1069 - 1580

Local Authority - Duty to clear pavements - Specification

Coltart v Fife Council (unreported)

Following the hard winter there will no doubt be a spate of slipping/tripping claims. In the case of Coltart v Fife Council, Sheriff Braid, sitting at Cupar, gave a very helpful summary of the present law and outlined in some detail the sort of facts that a Pursuer will have to set out in order to have any hope of succeeding with a claim of this type.

On 31st January 2003, Mr Coltart slipped and fell whilst walking along the pavement of Main Street, Ceres. It was said on his behalf that the pavement had been covered with snow and ice for several days and that further snow was forecast that day. The condition of the pavement was alleged to be an obvious danger to pedestrians. The Council, as Local Authority, were said to have a duty to keep the roads and pathways free of snow and ice and it was suggested that in terms of their own winter maintenance plan the pavement in question ought to have been given the highest priority for treatment. The action, which was brought at common law, was described by the Sheriff as essentially criticising the Local Authority for not having reacted quickly enough.

Fife Council suggested Mr Coltart's case was not detailed enough to go to Proof. Sheriff Braid began by confirming that there was no dispute a Local Authority are entitled to exercise discretion in deciding on the prioritisation to be given to the treatment of icy roads and footpaths.

The Sheriff said that it was not enough for a Pursuer just to say a road or footpath could have been treated. In order to have a chance of succeeding with a claim of this type the Pursuer would have to try and bring a case within at least one of the following three situations:-

(1) Compare and contrast the practice of the Local Authority in question with other Local Authorities. Set out what the practice of other Local Authorities was in similar
circumstances and say why the authority in question ought to have been seen as having fallen short of the norm.

(2) Put forward special or exceptional reasons why the authority ought to have been aware that the place where the accident occurred presented a particular danger and therefore required preferential treatment. This could be done by reference to previous accidents or complaints or to a feature of the location itself such as being immediately outside an old people's home that the authority were or ought to have been aware of.

(3) If the Local Authority in question had not followed its own winter maintenance strategy plan. Just establishing a deviation on its own would not be enough. You would have to go on to establish that the authority had, on this particular occasion, given priority to other roads and pavements which were afforded a lower ranking in the strategy plan than the place where the accident occurred or alternatively to set out and establish that the plan in force at the time required locations ranked at the level of the area where the accident occurred to be treated within a set time period and that the authority had failed to meet its own target.

Applying the principles he had identified to Mr Coltart's case, Sheriff Braid had no difficulty in deciding that it was irrelevant and he dismissed it. He pointed out that no attempt had been made to contrast what Fife Council had done here with what other authorities might have done in the same circumstances. There was no suggestion that Main Street, Ceres was known to be an accident blackspot or that there was any peculiarity which made it more dangerous than other locations in the region. Although reference was made to the Local Authority's maintenance plan and the fact that the location was accorded the highest priority it was not suggested that the Council had, on this occasion, treated other lower priority locations first or that there was a particular timescale within which locations ranked at this priority required to be treated.

This is the latest in a line of wintry slip/trip cases against local authorities which have failed. These are difficult cases for Pursuers to succeed with and we should be challenging all of those which do not measure up.

Subscribe to our news feeds

Keep up-to-date with all of our publications, legal updates, firm news and events.

Firm NewsLegal UpdatesSMIBEvents